Chandigarh, May 23 -- The Punjab government on Thursday told the Punjab and Haryana high court that controversy surrounding release of additional water to Haryana was a case of "institutional bullying" of Punjab, where Centre and other parties joined hands against one state. Appearing for the Punjab government, senior advocate Gurminder Singh claimed before the high court bench of chief justice Sheel Nagu and justice Sumeet Goel that "material facts" were concealed by the Centre and Haryana during proceedings in the court, following which the high court on May 6 directed the BBMB to release additional water to Haryana. The submissions were made during the hearing of a plea filed by Punjab seeking recall of the May 6 order. According to Singh, the high court was never informed of a statutory reference made by the BBMB chairman to the Centre on April 29 regarding the dispute over release of additional water. It was made at Haryana's behest on April 29 following a difference of opinion in the board meeting of April 28, where Punjab had opposed the move. It was then for the Centre to decide the issue in accordance with the provisions of Rule 7 of the BBMB Rules, 1974, he said, adding that the BBMB chairman, despite making the reference to the Centre, presided over a meeting the next day on April 30 and "chose to conceal and remain silent". The high court was also kept in the dark about the meeting presided over by the Union home secretary on May 2, which became basis for the May 6 order, he said further claiming that "nothing" about the meeting was circulated to the parties concerned and even the purpose of the meeting was "misrepresented". It was not about release of additional water but related to law and order, he said. The concealment of facts was not accidental but deliberate, Singh claimed adding that these things had a bearing on the court proceedings, which led to passing of the May 6 order. The BBMB had approached court "in garb" of an aggrieved seeking redressal of grievances regarding security. But the real intent was to seek "stamp of approval of an illegal act", he further submitted. The Centre and Haryana are to make their submissions on Friday. However, before the hearing could end on Thursday, additional solicitor general Satya Pal Jain responded by saying that there was no concealment and misrepresentation of facts by Centre. "Punjab is making attempts to get rid of the high court orders (of May 6)," Jain added. On May 6, the high court directed Punjab government to not interfere with the functioning of the BBMB and abide by the Union home secretary's May 2 decision which asked the BBMB to release additional 4,500 cusecs of water to Haryana. The HC order had come on a plea from the BBMB seeking withdrawal of Punjab cops from Nangal dam alleging that they were interfering with the working of board. The Punjab government on May 14 moved the high court seeking recall of the order arguing that the Union power secretary is the competent authority to deal with disputes around water sharing under the BBMB Act, and not the Union home secretary. The controversy erupted on April 28 when Haryana government's demand for additional water from the Bhakra dam was approved by the BBMB despite opposition from Punjab. The Punjab government refused to accept the decision and deployed police at Nangal dam, 13km downstream from Bhakra, to stop the additional water release....